I would think that he was praying for the other to lose ,if he is praying to win, or thanking God that they won and the other’s lost! I really don’t think a supreme being cares if a team wins or loses,if such a being would be partial over some little thing like a game,why doesn’t it seem to care about people who are in desparate need of help. It would seem this Supreme being is an unfair being, not a loving ,caring Father!
Do you recall Jesus’s attitude toward the Pharisees who made public display of their religion? He held them in contempt.
Yes, it’s true I observed that it is “excessive” and he agreed with me. I was just pointing out that your post literally just made the point that it was public, which agreed with both of us.
So, on to the point:
It exceeds what 98% of other sports figures and 99% of other humans in general do, so it seems pretty logical to categorize it as “excessive”.
Do you have an argument you can make that would support it not being “excessive”?
Why do I have to propose how anyone responds?
I just don’t think it’s “intolerant” to make jokes about it, I think it’s “funny”.
What?
What are you talking about?
“rape or dog fighting”?
Is this a serious post or is this some sort of joke?
This is the exchange and I’m having a hard time following the final point:
John Mace: It’s intolerant
RaftPeople: Disagree, it’s beyond the norms so it’s ok to make jokes
Shodan: It’s not like “rape or dog fighting”
We’re talking about jokes and your talking about “rape or dog fighting”?
I think people are a little unclear about what “tolerate” means. It’s not like anyone has tried to actually *stop *Tebow putting on his little shows. Simply noting that his little shows are tacky isn’t exactly persecution.
[QUOTE=RaftPeople]
Do you have an argument you can make that would support it not being “excessive”?
[/QUOTE]
John Mace’s argument suffices -
Your logic seems to be “most people don’t do it, therefore it’s excessive and Tebow shouldn’t do it.”
That doesn’t follow. Most people don’t play professional football either - that is not an argument for Tebow to resign from the team.
You might want to read the whole thread before you post to it.
Regards,
Shodan
I agree. Emphasis added:
Is it your take that one cannot use a word without following all possible definitions of that word?
It is my take that one may use the word following the #2 definition listed in a dictionary and not be called wrong for doing so.
It is my take that if one chooses to use a secondary or tertiary definition as opposed to the primary, one should say so before hand, just to keep matters clear. I don’t think Maher is intolerant of Tebow’s actions, according to the primary definition of the word.
Well, that’s an interesting opinion. Do you have a cite to back it up?
But just so you know, the word I actually used was:
Emphasis added. Now what’s your objection?
Tolerance is highly overrated.
In accordance with definition 10b, I hereby declare you a tort.
Isn’t that some kind of pie? Mmmm. Pie! And a New Year’s pie, to boot!! 
Threadwinner.
Perfectly exemplifies people talking past each other in this trainwreck.
This is accurate so far.
Can you answer these questions?
- Do you have an argument to support your position that it’s not excessive?
- If we apply that same argument from #1 to other behaviors, does it still seem to make sense?
I summarized my position as follows:
“RaftPeople: Disagree, it’s beyond the norms so it’s ok to make jokes”
and you are still unable to figure out what my position is?
I merely think it’s “funny” to make jokes about his excessive displays and I don’t think it’s intolerant.
So what was with the “rape and dog fighting” thing?
- I don’t have to have an argument that it is not excessive. You have to supply an argument showing that it is excessive.
- Yes, it makes a great deal of sense. Tebow isn’t hurting anyone with his prayers. Other NFL players are. Therefore, Maher would better serve the public if he spent whatever hold he has on the public attention ragging on those other players who are doing genuine harm.
But Maher does not spend that hold in that way. Because he just another busybody trying to stir up trouble because someone is disagreeing with him in public.
Regards,
Shodan
What is your position on humor that holds people up to ridicule? Is it always unjustified? Or only sometimes unjustified? Is it always equivalent to “stirring up trouble?” Should it always be limited to those who are “doing genuine harm”? Seems like a lot of rules for those in the humor biz.
I had no idea Bill Maher was a public servant. Well, *that *changes everything.
Why don’t you explain the “rape and dog fighting” thing? It’s hard for me to imagine what could be going through your brain that would first prompt that kind of comparison, and then silently refuse to address it.
What’s up with that?
Ok, I’ll humor you.
Kurt Warner thinks he should tone it down.
SNL did a skit because of it.
An opposing player “Tebowed” after a sack
Many in this thread think it’s excessive
Googling “Time Tebow religious display” I get 8 million hits, but only 322k for same thing for Kurt Warner (meaning it’s excessive enough to generate that much conversation and controversy)
etc.
More people consider this excessive than most other sports figures in recent memory, therefore it is reasonable to categorize it as excessive when compared to other sports figures behaviors from a social norm perspective.
My point #2 actually required a response to point #1 first. The “makes sense” part of it refers to using your logic from #1 and applying to other situations to see if it seems consistent.
Either way, the point you are challenging is whether it’s ok to make jokes about Tebow’s behavior. I don’t think Tebow is harming anyone either, but that is irrelevant. We’re just talking about jokes here, that’s all.
It’s from an earlier post on the same topic.
Can you think of an NFL player who is associated with dog fighting? How about one or more who was accused of rape? Or perhaps you could read the links I provided earlier in this thread for examples of other forms of misbehavior that Maher did not single out for his tweets.
Comedy shows and Google vomits do not constitute an argument.
Regards,
Shodan